rack power question
david raistrick
drais at icantclick.org
Sun Mar 23 04:26:37 UTC 2008
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Joe Greco wrote:
> Charging substantially less for rack space, even offset by higher costs for
> power, would encourage a lot of colo customers to "spread the load" around
> and not feel as obligated to maximize the use of space. That would in turn
> reduce the tendency for there to be excessive numbers of hot spots.
I wonder if we're to the point yet where we should just charge for power
and give the space away "free"....
When I'm shopping for colo that's pretty much the way I look at it. Power
determines space. I need 80,000W of power at the breaker, so I need
800sqftx15$ in facility A, and 320sqft at 40$ in facility B.
I can fit my 8 racks into either the 320sqft or into the 800. If I'm
doing the 800, I'll probably spend a bit more up front and use 12 or 14
racks, to keep my density down. A bit more cost up front, but in the
grand scheme of things 4 or 6 extra racks ($6 to 10,000$) don't directly
hurt to much. (80kW worth of power usually means you've got well north of
$2M worth of hardware and software being stuffed into the space in my
experience..but maybe that's because we're an Oracle shop. ;)
Of course, I suppose for those customers still doing super-low-density
boxes (webhosting with lots and lots of desktops), I suppose that model
wouldn't work as well.
ramble.
.d
---
david raistrick http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
drais at icantclick.org http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
More information about the NANOG
mailing list